Pub Date : 2020-07-02DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2020.1826142
M. Loukianov
Kirill Solov’ev, in the book under review, analyses how new political instruments and technologies influenced everyday political life in Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century. After a sh...
{"title":"Samoderzhavie i konstitutsiia: politicheskaia povsednevnost' v Rossii v 1906–1917 godakh","authors":"M. Loukianov","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2020.1826142","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2020.1826142","url":null,"abstract":"Kirill Solov’ev, in the book under review, analyses how new political instruments and technologies influenced everyday political life in Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century. After a sh...","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"33 1","pages":"271 - 273"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09546545.2020.1826142","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48492627","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-02DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2020.1815379
A. Cohen
The Civil War’s denouement into separate Bolshevik and White émigré memorial spaces meant that its monuments served to represent conflict between still-hostile sides, not promote reconciliation between victors and vanquished. Both sides worked inside a public space infused with the political and cultural mobilization for a continuing civil war. The Soviet and émigré populations were also separated by international borders, irreconcilable political ideologies and different public institutions, and neither side needed to integrate members of the former enemy into a shared political terrain. Finally, local people and interest groups showed more interest in Civil War memorials than national politicians and elites, and most war monuments addressed these proximate local priorities. In the city of Samara (renamed Kuibyshev in 1935) local officials wanted to promote the role of Vasilii Chapaev and local people in the Red victory over the central government’s preference for Mykola (Nikolai) Shchors, while the White memorial in Gallipoli was a site of mourning for defeated anti-Bolshevik armies. The resolution of enmity between the former combatants was thus not necessary, nor did it find expression in monumental form or content, and a common consensus on the public face of the war was never reached.
{"title":"The Civil War after the Civil War: Conflict, Reconciliation and Locality in Russian Civil War Monuments, 1922–1941","authors":"A. Cohen","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2020.1815379","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2020.1815379","url":null,"abstract":"The Civil War’s denouement into separate Bolshevik and White émigré memorial spaces meant that its monuments served to represent conflict between still-hostile sides, not promote reconciliation between victors and vanquished. Both sides worked inside a public space infused with the political and cultural mobilization for a continuing civil war. The Soviet and émigré populations were also separated by international borders, irreconcilable political ideologies and different public institutions, and neither side needed to integrate members of the former enemy into a shared political terrain. Finally, local people and interest groups showed more interest in Civil War memorials than national politicians and elites, and most war monuments addressed these proximate local priorities. In the city of Samara (renamed Kuibyshev in 1935) local officials wanted to promote the role of Vasilii Chapaev and local people in the Red victory over the central government’s preference for Mykola (Nikolai) Shchors, while the White memorial in Gallipoli was a site of mourning for defeated anti-Bolshevik armies. The resolution of enmity between the former combatants was thus not necessary, nor did it find expression in monumental form or content, and a common consensus on the public face of the war was never reached.","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"33 1","pages":"246 - 270"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09546545.2020.1815379","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47989618","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-02DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2020.1824605
A. Khalid
The Russian Revolution and the collapse of the Russian Empire that ensued from it led to the establishment of Soviet rule in the colonial peripheries of the Empire (its ‘borderlands’), a vast swath...
{"title":"Nomads and Soviet Rule: Central Asia under Lenin and Stalin","authors":"A. Khalid","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2020.1824605","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2020.1824605","url":null,"abstract":"The Russian Revolution and the collapse of the Russian Empire that ensued from it led to the establishment of Soviet rule in the colonial peripheries of the Empire (its ‘borderlands’), a vast swath...","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"33 1","pages":"282 - 284"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09546545.2020.1824605","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48977008","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-02DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2020.1813927
Mariya Melentyeva
In the spring of 1917, the Provisional Government headed by the liberals faced an unexpected challenge from Kiev, where local liberals supported the idea of an autonomous Ukraine within Russia. While the St Petersburg liberals did not dismiss the idea of Ukrainian autonomy entirely, they viewed this position as premature. Using internal Kadet party documents, this article argues that the central committee and Kiev party members interpreted nationalism in Russia’s political transformation differently. The Kiev liberals considered Ukrainian nationalism a tool for the liberal transformation of the region; in contrast, the liberals in the centre envisioned the liberalization of Russia as a juridical and universal process from above, separate from nationality questions.
{"title":"Liberals and the Ukrainian Question in Imperial Russia, 1905–1917","authors":"Mariya Melentyeva","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2020.1813927","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2020.1813927","url":null,"abstract":"In the spring of 1917, the Provisional Government headed by the liberals faced an unexpected challenge from Kiev, where local liberals supported the idea of an autonomous Ukraine within Russia. While the St Petersburg liberals did not dismiss the idea of Ukrainian autonomy entirely, they viewed this position as premature. Using internal Kadet party documents, this article argues that the central committee and Kiev party members interpreted nationalism in Russia’s political transformation differently. The Kiev liberals considered Ukrainian nationalism a tool for the liberal transformation of the region; in contrast, the liberals in the centre envisioned the liberalization of Russia as a juridical and universal process from above, separate from nationality questions.","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"33 1","pages":"151 - 171"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09546545.2020.1813927","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48006819","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-02DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2020.1821439
Felix Cowan
This article explores how Russians in the Duma period (1905–17) understood issues of democratic politics and representation through a microhistory of the 1912 Duma election in Odessa. It focuses on conflict between two Odessa newspapers, Odesskaia pochta and Iuzhnaia mysl’, over whether to support the ‘progressive’ candidate or the ‘workers’’ candidate, and on a workers’ boycott organized against Odesskaia pochta after right-wing candidates swept the election. This conflict sheds light on the divide among Russian progressives between politics as ongoing pragmatic compromise and politics as a clash of group interests. As Russians explored how to interact with new institutions like the Duma, ideas of democracy and representation intersected with class and other forms of identity in uncertain and unstable ways. Although the language of class identity often dominated, it was also used to express support for representative democracy and pragmatic coalition-building politics. Russians found more than one way to interpret democracy, and many chose to interpret it through the lens of parliamentary politics, even if they expressed those politics in class terms.
{"title":"The Democracy versus Democracy: Representation and Politics in Odessa during the 1912 State Duma Election","authors":"Felix Cowan","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2020.1821439","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2020.1821439","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores how Russians in the Duma period (1905–17) understood issues of democratic politics and representation through a microhistory of the 1912 Duma election in Odessa. It focuses on conflict between two Odessa newspapers, Odesskaia pochta and Iuzhnaia mysl’, over whether to support the ‘progressive’ candidate or the ‘workers’’ candidate, and on a workers’ boycott organized against Odesskaia pochta after right-wing candidates swept the election. This conflict sheds light on the divide among Russian progressives between politics as ongoing pragmatic compromise and politics as a clash of group interests. As Russians explored how to interact with new institutions like the Duma, ideas of democracy and representation intersected with class and other forms of identity in uncertain and unstable ways. Although the language of class identity often dominated, it was also used to express support for representative democracy and pragmatic coalition-building politics. Russians found more than one way to interpret democracy, and many chose to interpret it through the lens of parliamentary politics, even if they expressed those politics in class terms.","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"33 1","pages":"172 - 196"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09546545.2020.1821439","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46735903","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-02DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2020.1824725
Ian D. Thatcher
This is a superb account and exposition of Bogdanov's life and thought. It is a considerable achievement in a single volume to cover the range and depth of Bogdanov's writings over a thirty-year pe...
{"title":"Red Hamlet. The Life and Ideas of Alexander Bogdanov","authors":"Ian D. Thatcher","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2020.1824725","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2020.1824725","url":null,"abstract":"This is a superb account and exposition of Bogdanov's life and thought. It is a considerable achievement in a single volume to cover the range and depth of Bogdanov's writings over a thirty-year pe...","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"33 1","pages":"280 - 282"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09546545.2020.1824725","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45968698","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-02DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2020.1824719
John Keep
Alter Litvin, professor of Russian historiography at the University of Kazan’, has spent most of his life investigating the crimes of the Stalin era. Now aged 88, and in poor health, he has brought...
{"title":"Rossiiskaia istoriografiia gosudarstvennogo terrora v strane 1917–1953","authors":"John Keep","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2020.1824719","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2020.1824719","url":null,"abstract":"Alter Litvin, professor of Russian historiography at the University of Kazan’, has spent most of his life investigating the crimes of the Stalin era. Now aged 88, and in poor health, he has brought...","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"33 1","pages":"284 - 285"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09546545.2020.1824719","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43149473","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-02-13DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2020.1808318
Ian D. Thatcher
This article is the first detailed examination of the relationship between the political parties of the ‘broad centrist coalition’ and the first Provisional Government. It challenges the historiography that issues from P. N. Miliukov and A. I. Guchkov that the Provisional Government could not rule because of dual power, in which the executive lacked any support and was a prisoner of the Petrograd Soviet. The evidence presented here demonstrates that the policy of support for the Provisional Government ‘in so far as … ’ the executive pursued a progressive programme was (a) quite common at the time and (b) did not exclude recognition of the Provisional Government as the legitimate and sole power. The article details the range of interaction between the political parties and the Provisional Government, focusing on the ways in which the parties promoted the Provisional Government and acted as a critical friend over policy. Finally, the article argues that in this early period the parties changed from having no influence over the formation of the Provisional Government to being key players in the outcome of the first reshuffle of the executive following Guchkov’s resignation, which marked the triumph of a more left policy backed by existing ministers and the political parties.
{"title":"The ‘broad centrist’ political parties and the first provisional government, 3 march – 5 may 1917","authors":"Ian D. Thatcher","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2020.1808318","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2020.1808318","url":null,"abstract":"This article is the first detailed examination of the relationship between the political parties of the ‘broad centrist coalition’ and the first Provisional Government. It challenges the historiography that issues from P. N. Miliukov and A. I. Guchkov that the Provisional Government could not rule because of dual power, in which the executive lacked any support and was a prisoner of the Petrograd Soviet. The evidence presented here demonstrates that the policy of support for the Provisional Government ‘in so far as … ’ the executive pursued a progressive programme was (a) quite common at the time and (b) did not exclude recognition of the Provisional Government as the legitimate and sole power. The article details the range of interaction between the political parties and the Provisional Government, focusing on the ways in which the parties promoted the Provisional Government and acted as a critical friend over policy. Finally, the article argues that in this early period the parties changed from having no influence over the formation of the Provisional Government to being key players in the outcome of the first reshuffle of the executive following Guchkov’s resignation, which marked the triumph of a more left policy backed by existing ministers and the political parties.","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"33 1","pages":"197 - 220"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09546545.2020.1808318","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42323464","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-02DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2020.1750126
G. B. Creech
Based on archival materials from Russia and the United States, this article uses the experience of P. P. Batolin (1880–1939), a member of tsarist Russia's business elite, to investigate U.S.-Russian relations during Russia's revolution and civil war. Focusing on Batolin's campaign in the autumn of 1918 to persuade the Wilson administration to utilize economic assistance to Russia to weaken the Bolsheviks, this article explores Batolin's political views, the ways in which he promoted and mobilized support for his ideas, his recommended tactics to oust the Bolsheviks, and his attempts to persuade the government of the United States to adopt these strategies. I argue that through his interaction with political figures in Washington in the autumn of 1918, Batolin and his general ideas exerted influence on later U.S. policy towards Soviet Russia.
{"title":"A Russian businessman in Washington: P. P. Batolin and U.S.-Russian relations in late 1918","authors":"G. B. Creech","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2020.1750126","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2020.1750126","url":null,"abstract":"Based on archival materials from Russia and the United States, this article uses the experience of P. P. Batolin (1880–1939), a member of tsarist Russia's business elite, to investigate U.S.-Russian relations during Russia's revolution and civil war. Focusing on Batolin's campaign in the autumn of 1918 to persuade the Wilson administration to utilize economic assistance to Russia to weaken the Bolsheviks, this article explores Batolin's political views, the ways in which he promoted and mobilized support for his ideas, his recommended tactics to oust the Bolsheviks, and his attempts to persuade the government of the United States to adopt these strategies. I argue that through his interaction with political figures in Washington in the autumn of 1918, Batolin and his general ideas exerted influence on later U.S. policy towards Soviet Russia.","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"33 1","pages":"67 - 87"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09546545.2020.1750126","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42438851","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-02DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2020.1753288
Stanisław Boridczenko
The Lithuanian-Belorussian Soviet Socialist Republic (the Litbel) seems to have disappeared from historical memory. It is not surprising, for the short-lived republic sank into oblivion soon after its birth. The Litbel existed only for a few months, without international recognition or established borders. However, the Litbel deserves attention because echoes of the events in Eastern Europe at the dawn of the twentieth century still resonate today. In 1917, the October Revolution and the revival of the Polish state within its borders of 1772 brought the question of the future of the western regions bordering Russia to the forefront. Despite the Bolsheviks’ claim to protect the right of self-determination, they were not about to let those territories slip away. Although at first the idea to create a Soviet buffer state seemed attractive, its implementation showed the problem of this idea.
{"title":"A Buffer for Soviet Russia: A Brief History of the Litbel","authors":"Stanisław Boridczenko","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2020.1753288","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2020.1753288","url":null,"abstract":"The Lithuanian-Belorussian Soviet Socialist Republic (the Litbel) seems to have disappeared from historical memory. It is not surprising, for the short-lived republic sank into oblivion soon after its birth. The Litbel existed only for a few months, without international recognition or established borders. However, the Litbel deserves attention because echoes of the events in Eastern Europe at the dawn of the twentieth century still resonate today. In 1917, the October Revolution and the revival of the Polish state within its borders of 1772 brought the question of the future of the western regions bordering Russia to the forefront. Despite the Bolsheviks’ claim to protect the right of self-determination, they were not about to let those territories slip away. Although at first the idea to create a Soviet buffer state seemed attractive, its implementation showed the problem of this idea.","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"33 1","pages":"105 - 88"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09546545.2020.1753288","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46821126","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：